2019-10-04 12:10:16

by Fabien DESSENNE

Subject: [PATCH] remoteproc: stm32: fix probe error case

If the rproc driver is probed before the mailbox driver and if the rproc
Device Tree node has some mailbox properties, the rproc driver probe
shall be deferred instead of being probed without mailbox support.

Signed-off-by: Fabien Dessenne <[email protected]>
---
drivers/remoteproc/stm32_rproc.c | 12 +++++++++---
1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/stm32_rproc.c b/drivers/remoteproc/stm32_rproc.c
index 2cf4b29..410b794 100644
--- a/drivers/remoteproc/stm32_rproc.c
+++ b/drivers/remoteproc/stm32_rproc.c
@@ -310,7 +310,7 @@ static const struct stm32_mbox stm32_rproc_mbox[MBOX_NB_MBX] = {
}
};

-static void stm32_rproc_request_mbox(struct rproc *rproc)
+static int stm32_rproc_request_mbox(struct rproc *rproc)
{
struct stm32_rproc *ddata = rproc->priv;
struct device *dev = &rproc->dev;
@@ -328,11 +328,15 @@ static void stm32_rproc_request_mbox(struct rproc *rproc)
cl->dev = dev->parent;

ddata->mb[i].chan = mbox_request_channel_byname(cl, name);
- if (IS_ERR(ddata->mb[i].chan)) {
+ if (PTR_ERR(ddata->mb[i].chan) == -EPROBE_DEFER) {
+ return -EPROBE_DEFER;
+ } else if (IS_ERR(ddata->mb[i].chan)) {
dev_warn(dev, "cannot get %s mbox\n", name);
ddata->mb[i].chan = NULL;
}
}
+
+ return 0;
}

static int stm32_rproc_set_hold_boot(struct rproc *rproc, bool hold)
@@ -596,7 +600,9 @@ static int stm32_rproc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
if (ret)
goto free_rproc;

- stm32_rproc_request_mbox(rproc);
+ ret = stm32_rproc_request_mbox(rproc);
+ if (ret)
+ goto free_rproc;

ret = rproc_add(rproc);
if (ret)
--
2.7.4

2019-10-05 04:06:11

by Bjorn Andersson

Subject: Re: [PATCH] remoteproc: stm32: fix probe error case

On Fri 04 Oct 05:02 PDT 2019, Fabien Dessenne wrote:

> If the rproc driver is probed before the mailbox driver and if the rproc
> Device Tree node has some mailbox properties, the rproc driver probe
> shall be deferred instead of being probed without mailbox support.
>
> Signed-off-by: Fabien Dessenne <[email protected]>
> ---
> drivers/remoteproc/stm32_rproc.c | 12 +++++++++---
> 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/stm32_rproc.c b/drivers/remoteproc/stm32_rproc.c
> index 2cf4b29..410b794 100644
> --- a/drivers/remoteproc/stm32_rproc.c
> +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/stm32_rproc.c
> @@ -310,7 +310,7 @@ static const struct stm32_mbox stm32_rproc_mbox[MBOX_NB_MBX] = {
> }
> };
>
> -static void stm32_rproc_request_mbox(struct rproc *rproc)
> +static int stm32_rproc_request_mbox(struct rproc *rproc)
> {
> struct stm32_rproc *ddata = rproc->priv;
> struct device *dev = &rproc->dev;
> @@ -328,11 +328,15 @@ static void stm32_rproc_request_mbox(struct rproc *rproc)
> cl->dev = dev->parent;
>
> ddata->mb[i].chan = mbox_request_channel_byname(cl, name);
> - if (IS_ERR(ddata->mb[i].chan)) {
> + if (PTR_ERR(ddata->mb[i].chan) == -EPROBE_DEFER) {

You may not use PTR_ERR() without first checking IS_ERR(), apart from
that your patch looks good.

Regards,
Bjorn

> + return -EPROBE_DEFER;
> + } else if (IS_ERR(ddata->mb[i].chan)) {
> dev_warn(dev, "cannot get %s mbox\n", name);
> ddata->mb[i].chan = NULL;
> }
> }
> +
> + return 0;
> }
>
> static int stm32_rproc_set_hold_boot(struct rproc *rproc, bool hold)
> @@ -596,7 +600,9 @@ static int stm32_rproc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> if (ret)
> goto free_rproc;
>
> - stm32_rproc_request_mbox(rproc);
> + ret = stm32_rproc_request_mbox(rproc);
> + if (ret)
> + goto free_rproc;
>
> ret = rproc_add(rproc);
> if (ret)
> --
> 2.7.4
>